Legatarius testamenti factionem habet et usufructum accipit.

The subject is legatarius.

It is in the nominative singular, so it is the person doing the actions of the two verbs:

• habet = has
• accipit = receives

So legatarius is the one who has something and receives something.

Legatarius is nominative singular.

A learner can tell this because:

• it is the noun that matches the verbs as the subject
• its ending -us is a very common nominative singular ending for a second-declension masculine noun

So here legatarius means the legatee as the grammatical subject.

Testamenti is in the genitive singular of testamentum.

The genitive often expresses ideas like:

• of the will
• belonging to the will
• connected with the will

In this sentence, testamenti most naturally goes with factionem, forming the legal expression testamenti factio. So it is not just any random genitive; it is part of a set legal phrase.

It goes with factionem.

The important phrase here is testamenti factionem habet, literally something like has will-capacity or has testamentary capacity.

So the structure is:

• legatarius = subject
• testamenti factionem = object phrase
• habet = verb

A native English speaker might first try to connect testamenti directly to legatarius, but in this sentence the stronger grammatical and legal connection is with factionem.

They are both direct objects.

They answer the question what?

• factionem habet = he has capacity
• usufructum accipit = he receives usufruct

Their accusative singular endings are:

• factionem from factio
• usufructum from usufructus

So both are objects, but each belongs to its own verb.

The sentence has one subject and two coordinated verb phrases:

• Legatarius = subject
• testamenti factionem habet = first statement
• et = and
• usufructum accipit = second statement

So the full pattern is:

subject + object + verb + and + object + verb

Latin often does this very neatly: one subject is understood with both verbs.

Et connects the two verbal ideas:

• testamenti factionem habet
• usufructum accipit

In other words, it links two actions done by the same subject, legatarius.

It is not mainly joining factionem and usufructum as a pair of objects under one verb. Each object has its own verb.

Yes. Latin word order is more flexible than English because the endings show the grammatical roles.

For example, the same basic meaning could still be expressed with a different order, such as:

• Testamenti factionem legatarius habet et usufructum accipit.
• Legatarius usufructum accipit et testamenti factionem habet.

That said, the original order is perfectly natural. Latin often places important noun phrases before their verbs, and set expressions like testamenti factio tend to stay together.

Because Latin has no articles.

So a Latin noun like legatarius can mean:

• a legatee
• the legatee

The exact choice in English depends on context, not on a separate Latin word.

The same is true for:

• testamentum = a will / the will
• usufructus = a usufruct / the usufruct

Yes historically, but you should be careful.

In this sentence, factionem does not mean a political faction in the modern English sense. Here it belongs to the legal phrase testamenti factio.

So this is a good example of a false friend: the form looks familiar to an English speaker, but the meaning here is specialized and different.

It comes from factio, factionis, a third-declension feminine noun.

Here:

• dictionary form: factio
• accusative singular: factionem

That is why it ends in -em, which is a very common accusative singular ending for third-declension nouns.

It comes from usufructus, usufructus, a fourth-declension masculine noun.

Here:

• dictionary form: usufructus
• accusative singular: usufructum

This can confuse learners because -us in the nominative and -um in the accusative may look like a second-declension noun, but usufructus is actually fourth declension.

There is no special rule requiring that order, but it is a natural way to present the two ideas.

Latin often gives one statement and then adds another with et. So here the sentence first says what the legatee has, then what he receives.

The order is stylistic and logical, not a matter of strict grammar.

Both are third person singular present active indicative.

• habet = he/she/it has
• accipit = he/she/it receives

They are singular because the subject legatarius is singular.

Here is a full grammatical breakdown:

• Legatarius — noun, nominative singular masculine; subject
• testamenti — noun, genitive singular neuter of testamentum
• factionem — noun, accusative singular feminine of factio; object of habet
• habet — verb, 3rd person singular present active indicative of habere
• et — coordinating conjunction, and
• usufructum — noun, accusative singular masculine of usufructus; object of accipit
• accipit — verb, 3rd person singular present active indicative of accipere

Yes.

At least two parts are especially legal in tone:

• testamenti factio — a technical Roman-law expression
• usufructus — also a legal term

So even if the grammar is straightforward, the vocabulary is more specialized than ordinary everyday Latin. That is one reason a learner may understand the cases and still find the sentence a bit difficult.